TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
"Dave Whelan" <dave -dot- whelan -at- home -dot- com> wrote:
>>For commercial software, the dilemma is that the client won't pay the price
>>needed to assure bug-free software.
>
>This seems to be the conventional wisdom but I think we need to question
>this assertion. If clients were offered a choice between two versions of the
>same software, one that worked properly and one that didn't, do you think
>they would choose the dysfunctional version, even at a substantial discount?
What about a version that was buggy, but delivered three months
earlier? As in Hollywood, so in the software business: people
don't want it good, they want it Thursday.
I suspect that many companies decide on releases using an
insurance model: will it cost more to fix the software, or to
provide technical support for the current bugs? If fixing costs
more, then the release goes ahead.
There's also many areas that need improvement but never get it
because customes won't pay more for a good feature. Many devices
and drivers fall into this area. For example, where are the
reliable translation filters for common word processing formats?
>No, the phenomenon of the acceptance of crappy software is a temporary one,
>I am sure. Eventually, software is going to lose its mystique and will have
>to comply with the bargaining standards to which everything else is subject.
One solution that is already happening is the open source
movement, in which people are writing their own corrections to
existing software, and their own alternatives to existing
software. For example, there is already a reasonably professional
graphics program (The GIMP), and free alternative sto
PartitionMagic (GNU Parted and Diskdrake). One of the arguments
pushed by the Open Source Initiative is that freely available
code means a larger pool of programmers, which means that bugs
are found and corrected faster than in proprietary methods.
I'm not sure that's entirely true - I've seen some very quick
responses from Adobe, for example - but there's some truth there.
Another solution seems to be forming around The ClueTrain
Manifesto (www.cluetrain.com), which advocates an end to
conventional marketing and a more open, honest relation with
customers.
Still, whatever the solution - hurry the day!
--
Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
"The Open Road" column, Maximum Linux
3015 Aries Place, Burnaby, BC V3J 7E8, Canada
bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com 604.421.7189
"He in a new confusion of his understanding,
I in a new understanding of my confusion."
- Robert Graves, "Broken Images"
